Related Topics:

One of the things that drives me crazy about living in the city is watching how city workers carelessly spray weeds in public parks, along the sidewalk, and anywhere else they deem weeds unacceptable. As a mother of young children, I don't appreciate the use of weed killers such as Roundup in public areas.

Granted, I have an aversion to chemicals in general, but a recent, peer-reviewed scientific paper that links Roundup to gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer's disease makes me feel that I'm right to voice my concerns

You can read the abstract and download the PDF of the study, which was published in the journal Entropy. Here are a few takeaways.

Glyphosate is the active ingredients in Roundup, the worlds' most popular herbicide.

While the industry claims that it is minimally toxic to humans, this study argues otherwise.

Residues of glyphosates are found in much of the Western diet.

Glyphosates inhibit cytochrome enzymes, which play crucial roles in the body, including the detoxification of xenobiotics. This is an overlooked toxicity issue of Roundup.

Because glyphosates have this effect on cytochrome enzymes, it enhances the damaging effects of other foodborne chemical residues and environmental toxins.

The harmful effects of glyphosates manifest slowly, and over time they damage cellular systems throughout the body.

In simple terms, the study is saying that traces of Roundup can be found in foods and that Roundup may make our bodies more susceptible to other environmental toxins.

This is sobering news.

If you have to, I recommend that you choose weeds over toxins in your yard. It breaks my heart to see weed killer sprayed in yards where young children will play. I am going to be looking into some natural weed killer solutions, and I'll let you know what I find.

Strangely, someone named Alan Van Dyke is routinely quoted as having studied pholcid venom, with absolutely no hint of it in any scholarly journal or publication of any kind. In fact, his name only comes up as a reference in marketing, not any scholarly field of research I can find anywhere.

But it appears to be true that of the 2000 varieties of spiders ever researched, pholcidae appears to be none of them, at least not in English.

Doesn't change the main point: toxin is in the dose, not the compound.

Quoting kameka:

Ok, how about this:

"Daddy-longlegs spiders (Pholcidae) - Here, the myth is incorrect at least in making claims that have no basis in known facts. There is no reference to any pholcid spider biting a human and causing any detrimental reaction. If these spiders were indeed deadly poisonous but couldn't bite humans, then the only way we would know that they are poisonous is by milking them and injecting the venom into humans. For a variety of reasons including Amnesty International and a humanitarian code of ethics, this research has never been done. Furthermore, there are no toxicological studies testing the lethality of pholcid venom on any mammalian system (this is usually done with mice). Therefore, no information is available on the likely toxic effects of their venom in humans, so the part of the myth about their being especially poisonous is just that: a myth. There is no scientific basis for the supposition that they are deadly poisonous and there is no reason to assume that it is true."

From http://spiders.ucr.edu/daddylonglegs.html

Quoting LindaClement:

Being able to 'harm a human being' has no bearing on the toxicity of the venom.

Quoting kameka:

Nope

http://insects.about.com/od/noninsectarthropods/f/daddylongvenom.htm

Quoting LindaClement:

Actually... it's not.

In fact, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the term 'toxic.'

Toxin is in the dose. Period.

Water is toxic in high dosages. It is not 'still toxic' in reasonable doses.

The most toxic spider venom on the planet is from Daddy Long-legs. Which is hilariously irrelevant because they make so little of it they can't kill a gerbil with a bite.

Strangely, someone named Alan Van Dyke is routinely quoted as having studied pholcid venom, with absolutely no hint of it in any scholarly journal or publication of any kind. In fact, his name only comes up as a reference in marketing, not any scholarly field of research I can find anywhere.

But it appears to be true that of the 2000 varieties of spiders ever researched, pholcidae appears to be none of them, at least not in English.

Doesn't change the main point: toxin is in the dose, not the compound.

Quoting kameka:

Ok, how about this:

"Daddy-longlegs spiders (Pholcidae) - Here, the myth is incorrect at least in making claims that have no basis in known facts. There is no reference to any pholcid spider biting a human and causing any detrimental reaction. If these spiders were indeed deadly poisonous but couldn't bite humans, then the only way we would know that they are poisonous is by milking them and injecting the venom into humans. For a variety of reasons including Amnesty International and a humanitarian code of ethics, this research has never been done. Furthermore, there are no toxicological studies testing the lethality of pholcid venom on any mammalian system (this is usually done with mice). Therefore, no information is available on the likely toxic effects of their venom in humans, so the part of the myth about their being especially poisonous is just that: a myth. There is no scientific basis for the supposition that they are deadly poisonous and there is no reason to assume that it is true."

From http://spiders.ucr.edu/daddylonglegs.html

Quoting LindaClement:

Being able to 'harm a human being' has no bearing on the toxicity of the venom.

Quoting kameka:

Nope

http://insects.about.com/od/noninsectarthropods/f/daddylongvenom.htm

Quoting LindaClement:

Actually... it's not.

In fact, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the term 'toxic.'

Toxin is in the dose. Period.

Water is toxic in high dosages. It is not 'still toxic' in reasonable doses.

The most toxic spider venom on the planet is from Daddy Long-legs. Which is hilariously irrelevant because they make so little of it they can't kill a gerbil with a bite.

We mostly have dandelions in our yard and they are harvested for their medicinal properties. Dandelion leaves are yummy when sauteed with fennel, mushrooms and onions. And they are free. For other weeds, I use a mix of vinegar and salt.

Awareness campaigns for diseases cancers and conditions that have always been with us, are the height of popularity now. This coincides with the ever exploding foodie trend which has spilled into cooking and "health" shows on TV. Diagnostc tools and media awareness lead to more people being diagnosed. The more folks diagnosed, the more open talk and the more people want to go get tested themselves, etc... glysophate based herbicide and bt herbicides(whichare species specific as well) are the gentlest conventional weed killers as yet to be used on a commercial scale...all this means nothing if your position is a belief and not an expression of what you have learned in science...so there is no point in trying to make you understand...you want to believe that weedkiller or gmos are causing disease...the rest of us hope your belief will not interfere with researching the actual causes and cures for such conditions.

Strangely, someone named Alan Van Dyke is routinely quoted as having studied pholcid venom, with absolutely no hint of it in any scholarly journal or publication of any kind. In fact, his name only comes up as a reference in marketing, not any scholarly field of research I can find anywhere.

But it appears to be true that of the 2000 varieties of spiders ever researched, pholcidae appears to be none of them, at least not in English.

Doesn't change the main point: toxin is in the dose, not the compound.

Strangely, someone named Alan Van Dyke is routinely quoted as having studied pholcid venom, with absolutely no hint of it in any scholarly journal or publication of any kind. In fact, his name only comes up as a reference in marketing, not any scholarly field of research I can find anywhere.

But it appears to be true that of the 2000 varieties of spiders ever researched, pholcidae appears to be none of them, at least not in English.

Doesn't change the main point: toxin is in the dose, not the compound.

Quoting kameka:

Ok, how about this:

"Daddy-longlegs spiders (Pholcidae) - Here, the myth is incorrect at least in making claims that have no basis in known facts. There is no reference to any pholcid spider biting a human and causing any detrimental reaction. If these spiders were indeed deadly poisonous but couldn't bite humans, then the only way we would know that they are poisonous is by milking them and injecting the venom into humans. For a variety of reasons including Amnesty International and a humanitarian code of ethics, this research has never been done. Furthermore, there are no toxicological studies testing the lethality of pholcid venom on any mammalian system (this is usually done with mice). Therefore, no information is available on the likely toxic effects of their venom in humans, so the part of the myth about their being especially poisonous is just that: a myth. There is no scientific basis for the supposition that they are deadly poisonous and there is no reason to assume that it is true."

From http://spiders.ucr.edu/daddylonglegs.html

Quoting LindaClement:

Being able to 'harm a human being' has no bearing on the toxicity of the venom.

Quoting kameka:

Nope

http://insects.about.com/od/noninsectarthropods/f/daddylongvenom.htm

Quoting LindaClement:

Actually... it's not.

In fact, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the term 'toxic.'

Toxin is in the dose. Period.

Water is toxic in high dosages. It is not 'still toxic' in reasonable doses.

The most toxic spider venom on the planet is from Daddy Long-legs. Which is hilariously irrelevant because they make so little of it they can't kill a gerbil with a bite.

Quoting GLWerth:

"Minimally Toxic" is still toxic. Just sayin'.

Yeah. B/c if it walks like, talks like...smells like a bunch of blustering bravado bullshit..it likely IS bullshit.

Goodwoman, I noticed that you "liked" my reply. Was this an accident? I am pro real science and have no worries about GMOs and really appreciate Linda's effort to help people here grasp some concepts pertaining to the concerns.

Quoting Goodwoman614:

Quoting kameka:

I had no problem with your main point, but citing incorrect data brings to question the validity of your other claims. I figured you might want to know that what you were saying is utterly unproven.

Strangely, someone named Alan Van Dyke is routinely quoted as having studied pholcid venom, with absolutely no hint of it in any scholarly journal or publication of any kind. In fact, his name only comes up as a reference in marketing, not any scholarly field of research I can find anywhere.

But it appears to be true that of the 2000 varieties of spiders ever researched, pholcidae appears to be none of them, at least not in English.

Doesn't change the main point: toxin is in the dose, not the compound.

Quoting kameka:

Ok, how about this:

"Daddy-longlegs spiders (Pholcidae) - Here, the myth is incorrect at least in making claims that have no basis in known facts. There is no reference to any pholcid spider biting a human and causing any detrimental reaction. If these spiders were indeed deadly poisonous but couldn't bite humans, then the only way we would know that they are poisonous is by milking them and injecting the venom into humans. For a variety of reasons including Amnesty International and a humanitarian code of ethics, this research has never been done. Furthermore, there are no toxicological studies testing the lethality of pholcid venom on any mammalian system (this is usually done with mice). Therefore, no information is available on the likely toxic effects of their venom in humans, so the part of the myth about their being especially poisonous is just that: a myth. There is no scientific basis for the supposition that they are deadly poisonous and there is no reason to assume that it is true."

From http://spiders.ucr.edu/daddylonglegs.html

Quoting LindaClement:

Being able to 'harm a human being' has no bearing on the toxicity of the venom.

Quoting kameka:

Nope

http://insects.about.com/od/noninsectarthropods/f/daddylongvenom.htm

Quoting LindaClement:

Actually... it's not.

In fact, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the term 'toxic.'

Toxin is in the dose. Period.

Water is toxic in high dosages. It is not 'still toxic' in reasonable doses.

The most toxic spider venom on the planet is from Daddy Long-legs. Which is hilariously irrelevant because they make so little of it they can't kill a gerbil with a bite.

Quoting GLWerth:

"Minimally Toxic" is still toxic. Just sayin'.

Yeah. B/c if it walks like, talks like...smells like a bunch of blustering bravado bullshit..it likely IS bullshit.